政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/152860
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113318/144297 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51085663      線上人數 : 915
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152860


    題名: 彈性還是控制？美食外送員的生涯與勞動圖像
    Flexibility or Control? The Career and Labor Practice of Food Delivery Drivers
    作者: 盧子樵
    Lu, Tzu-Chiao
    貢獻者: 鄭力軒
    Cheng, Li-Hsuan
    盧子樵
    Lu, Tzu-Chiao
    關鍵詞: 美食外送員
    工作生涯
    勞動圖像
    共享經濟
    數位監控
    Food delivery drivers
    Work career
    Labor practice
    Sharing economy
    Digital surveillance
    日期: 2024
    上傳時間: 2024-08-05 14:27:17 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 目前平台工作的相關論點，聚焦共享經濟與數位監控兩面向。共享經濟強調平台得以讓零碎的勞務被定價，使「陌生人共享」為工人創造收入，分散企業中心化的壟斷模式。數位監控則強調平台對於演算法、資訊與工人合約的掌握，形成對工人勞動控制的數位牢籠。
    根據上述兩個理論觀點，有關平台美食外送員的勞動研究，大多聚焦後者，強調平台對於工人的數位監控。例如，平台透過數位趕工遊戲的獎勵制度，使工人更願意投入其中。或批評平台掌握合約與演算法，讓工人只能被動接受平台制度與薪資調整。抑或從勞動法、勞動民族誌切入，強調平台「假承攬，真雇傭」，面對政府制度與管制措施，平台如同制度的變色龍。
    本研究肯認平台的勞動控制本質以及相關研究，但本研究想從既有的批判性勞動研究成果，更進一步的深入探討外送工作，對於幾乎人人都可上線註冊、背景多元的美食外送員有什麼不同的意義？有著怎樣殊異的工作生涯與勞動圖像？美食外送員如何經驗平台的彈性與控制？
    本研究透過質性研究的參與觀察、深度訪談以及美食外送員網路社群討論版收集資料。研究者成為外送員，投入外送員的勞動場域中，並邀請外送工作「投入程度」不同，以及外送佔「個人收入比例」不同的外送員參與訪談研究，根據二者，將外送員分成四種類型，分別是：「上線打工者」、「生涯過渡者」、「工作游牧者」與「平台受困者」。梳理平台外送的勞動過程中的行動者與平台勞動控制的機制。
    本研究發現，高度投入、外送佔個人收入比高的外送員，往往容易受困於平台工作中，面對平台減薪、調整制度，只能被動接受。部分人力資本較低、被典型勞動市場排除者，即便遭到平台減薪，仍然會抱持「感謝平台」的心理。低度投入、外送佔個人收入比低的外送員，則將外送視為彈性的好兼職，平台為彈性時間、簡單勞務，創造額外收入，部分外送員並在找到其他工作、創業以後，隨即離開外送工作，外送工作得以成為他們轉銜至下個人生階段的橋樑。
    彈性與控制之間，本研究不否認平台的數位監控以及共享經濟創造彈性收入的好處。但本研究試圖從多元背景的外送員，指出外送之於其生涯的不同意義。最後試圖從彈性的外送工作提出對傳統、典型勞動市場，要求勞工高度、全身心投入的反思，指出台灣外送產業的特處，並針對兩大平台併購與平台外送的現在進行式，提出政策建言。
    Current studies on platform labor emphasize two main aspects: the sharing economy and the digital surveillance. The sharing economy emphasizes how platforms can monetize fragmented labor, allowing "stranger sharing" to create income for workers and decentralizing the monopoly of enterprises. The Digital surveillance highlights the platform's control over algorithms, information, and worker contracts, creating a digital cage that controls workers' labor.

    Based on these two theoretical perspectives, most labor research on platform food delivery workers focuses on the digital surveillance of workers by the platform. This study acknowledges the nature of platform labor control and related research but aims to delve deeper into the existing critical labor research outcomes. It seeks to explore what different meanings food delivery work holds for the diverse backgrounds of delivery workers, who can almost all register online, and what distinct work careers and labor images emerge.

    This study uses qualitative research methods, including participant observation, in-depth interviews, and data collection from online community discussion boards of food delivery workers. The researcher becomes a delivery worker, immersing in the labor field, and invites delivery workers with varying levels of "engagement" and differing proportions of "personal income" derived from delivery work to participate in the interviews. Based on these two factors, delivery workers are categorized into four types: "part-time workers," "career transitioners," "work nomads," and "platform captives." The study maps out the actors in the labor process of platform delivery and the mechanisms of platform labor control.

    The study finds that highly engaged delivery workers, whose income heavily depends on delivery work, are often trapped in platform work, passively accepting platform pay cuts and system adjustments. Some workers with lower human capital, excluded from the typical labor market, even express gratitude towards the platform despite pay cuts. On the other hand, delivery workers with low engagement and low dependency on delivery income view it as a flexible and good part-time job. For them, the platform provides flexible hours and simple tasks that generate extra income. Some leave delivery worker as soon as they find other jobs or start their businesses, making delivery work a bridge to the next stage of their lives.

    Between flexibility and control, this study does not deny the digital surveillance of the platform and the benefits of creating flexible income in the sharing economy. However, it attempts to highlight the different meanings of delivery work for workers from diverse backgrounds. Finally, it seeks to reflect on the traditional, typical labor market's demand for high, wholehearted worker engagement, pointing out the unique characteristics of Taiwan's delivery industry. The study also provides policy recommendations regarding the ongoing mergers of the two major platforms and the current state of platform delivery work.
    參考文獻: Bearson, Dafna., Kenney, Martin., and Zysman, John.（2020）Measuring the impacts of labor in the platform economy: new work created, old work reorganized, and value creation reconfigured. Industrial and Corporate Change, 30(3): 1-28.
    Burawoy, Michael.（1982）著，林宗弘、張烽益、鄭力軒、沈倖如、王鼎傑、周文仁、魏希聖（2005）譯《製造甘願：壟斷資本主義勞動過程的歷史變遷》新北市：群學出版有限公司。
    Calo, Ryan. and Rosenblat, Alex.（2017）The Taking Economy: Uber, Information, and Power. Columbia Law Review, 117: 1623-1690.
    Cutolo, Donato. and Kenney, Martin.（2019）Platform-Dependent Entrepreneurs: Power Asymmetries, Risk, and Strategy in the Platform Economy. Academy of Management Perspectives, 35(1): 1-56.
    Doorn, Niels van. and Chen, Julie Yujie.（2021）Odds stacked against workers: datafied gamification on Chinese and American food delivery platforms. Socio-Economic Review, 19(4):1345-1367.
    Duffy B. Erin.（2015）The romance of work: Gender and aspirational labour in the digital culture industries. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 19(4): 441-457.
    Einav, Liran., Kuchler, Theresa., Levin, Jonathan. and Sundaresan, Neel.（2015）Assessing Sale Strategies in Online Markets Using Matched Listings. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 7(2): 215-247.
    Frenken, Koen. and Schor, Juliet.（2017）Putting the sharing economy into perspective. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23: 3-10.
    Frenken, Koen., Meelen, Toon. Arets, Martijn., and Glind, Pieter. Van De.（2015）Smarter Regulation for the Sharing Economy. The Guardian 2015.5.20.
    Gerber, Christine., and Krzywdzinski, Martin.（2019）Brave New Digital Work? New Forms of Performance Control in Crowdwork. Work and Labor in the Digital Age: 121-143. Emerald Publishing.
    Goffman, Erving.（1963），曾凡慈譯（2010）。《污名：管理受損身分的筆記》。新北：群學出版社。
    Gold, Raymond L.（1958）Roles in sociological field observation. Social Forces, 36: 217-213.
    Kalleberg, Arne L., Barbara F. Reskin., and Ken Hudson（2000）Bad Jobs in America: Standard and Nonstandard Employment Relations and Job Quality in the United States. American Sociology Review 65(2):256-287.
    Kelkar, Shreeharsh.（2018）Engineering a platform: The construction of interfaces, users, organizational roles, and the division of labor. New Media and Society, 20(7): 2629-2646.
    Kenney, Martin., Bearson, Dafna., and Zysman. John.（2021）The platform economy matures: measuring pervasiveness and exploring power. Socio-Economic Review, 19(4): 1451–1483.
    Kenney, Martin. and Zysman. John.（2016）The Rise of the Platform Economy. Issues in Science and Technology, 32(3):61-69.
    Lei, Ya-wen. Delivering Solidarity: Platform Architecture and Collective Contention in China’s Platform Economy. American Sociological Review, 86(2): 279-309.
    Mason, Sarah.（2018）High score, low pay: why the gig economy loves gamification. The Guardian 2018.11.20.
    Munn, Luke.（2017）I am a Driver-Partner. Work Organisation, Labour and Globalisation, 11(2): 7-20.
    Neff, Gina.（2012）Venture Labor: Work and the Burden of Risk in Innovative Industries. MIT Press.
    Siltaoja, M. E., Lahdesmaki, M., Puska, P., Kurki, S., and Luomala, H.（2015）. From Shame to Fame: A Model of the Destigmatization Process in Media Discourse. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2015(1), 11686.
    Srnicek, Nick.（2016）Platform Capitalism. Wiley.
    Sundararajan, Arun.（2016）The Sharing Economy, Market Economies, and Gift Economies. The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowd-Based Capitalism: 23-46. MIT Press.
    Thelen, Kathleen.（2018）Regulating Uber: The Politics of the Platform Economy in Europe and the United States. Perspectives on Politics, 16(4): 938–953.
    Vallas, Steven. and Schor, Juliet B.（2020）What Do Platforms Do? Understanding the Gig Economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46:273-294.
    Wood, Alex J., Graham, Mark., Lehdonvirta, Vili., and Hjorth, Isis（2019）Networked but Commodified: The (Dis)Embeddedness of Digital Labour in the Gig Economy. Sociology, 53(5): 931–950.
    Zuboff, Shoshana.（2016）著，溫澤元、林怡婷、陳思穎（2020）譯《監控資本主義時代（上卷：基礎與演進；下卷：機器控制力量）》台北市：時報出版。
    未來流通研究所（2020）〈【產業地圖圖解】一張圖看懂2020台灣「餐飲外送平台」產業版圖〉。檢索日期：2022.7.28。網址：https://www.mirai.com.tw/2020-taiwan-food-delivery-industry-competition-map/
    吳嘉苓（2015）〈第2章：訪談法〉。《社會及行為科學研究法——質性研究法》。台北市：東華書局。
    宋庭語（2020）《餐飲外送平台經濟工作者勞動關係之探討－以美國加州法規範為比較》。國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文。
    林裕錡（2021）〈我是外送員，我也是⋯⋯〉。報導者。2021.11.21。網址：https://www.twreporter.org/a/photo-food-delivery-riders-and-slashies
    柯志哲、張珮青（2014）。〈區隔的勞動市場？：探討臺灣典型與非典型工作者的工作流動與薪資差異〉。《臺灣社會學刊》55：127-177。
    柯志哲、張榮利（2006）。〈協力外包制度新探：以一個鋼鐵業協力外包體系為例〉。《臺灣社會學刊》37：33-78。
    洪惠芬（2015）〈新世代臺灣母親的處境與挑戰：就業母親在照顧與工. 作之間的文化矛盾〉。《臺灣社會福利學刊》13(1): 87-149。
    徐婉寧（2021）〈論平台經濟美食外送員之勞動權益保障〉。《臺灣海洋法學報》30: 1-24。
    婦女新知基金會（2010）。〈【女人讀報】護理師正名：別再叫「小姐」〉，檢索日期：2023／4／26。網址：https://www.awakening.org.tw/news/3100
    張晉芬（2013）《勞動社會學》。台北市：政大出版社。
    陳向明（2002）《社會科學質的研究》。台北市：五南。
    陳哲森（2023）《以演算法誘導勞動： 外送平台勞動過程的建構與成本外部化》。東海大學社會學系碩士論文。
    陳麗萍、王素彎（2020）〈透過平台業者APP提供勞務之國內工作者工作樣態研究-以食品愛送平台為例〉。勞動部職業安全衛生研究所。
    勞動部（2019）〈勞動契約認定指導原則〉。2022.7.21。網址：https://www.mol.gov.tw/media/seljrmqo/%E5%8B%9E%E5%8B%95%E5%A5%91%E7%B4%84%E8%AA%8D%E5%AE%9A%E6%8C%87%E5%B0%8E%E5%8E%9F%E5%89%87.pdf?mediaDL=true
    黃帥升、謝祥揚（2020）〈僱傭承攬大不同？談外送平台與外送員間契約關係爭議〉。《會計研究月刊》410: 44-49。
    蔡宛芸（2023）《超級外送員：使命必達的省時戰》。台北市：游擊文化。
    戴伯芬（1994）〈誰做攤販？—臺灣攤販的歷史形構〉。《臺灣社會研究》17: 121-148。
    聯合新聞網（2021）〈疫情影響訂單爆增 6、7月機車外送員車禍1死、312人傷〉。2021.8.27。網址：https://udn.com/news/story/7320/5703281
    聯合新聞網（2022）〈網曬「母帶孩跑外送照」網掀熱議：剛好接孩子？〉。2022.7.21。網址：https://udn.com/news/story/120911/6478372
    謝國雄（1997）《純勞動：台灣勞動體制諸論》。台北市：中央研究院社會學研究所籌備處。
    蘋果新聞網（2022）〈一直接單「送奶粉到火災空屋」外送員集體扮柯南！揪出犯罪集團〉。2022.2.28。網址：https://www.appledaily.com.tw/local/20220228/YZWTO63ITBCR7K3IZMOWVQ3YU4/
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    社會學系
    110254011
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110254011
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[社會學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    401101.pdf3263KbAdobe PDF0檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋